The fear of North Korea

[Jason]

Op, Op, Op, Oppan Pyongyan Style!

[Tero]

They managed to hook a mouse to their missile computer!

[klr]

Apart from the mouse and keyboard, it does look rather low tech.

... damn, the EXIF information has been removed, so we don't know what sort of capitalist camera was used.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

At least it's a portable.

[FBM]

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/north-kor ... 43082.html

North Korea Likely To Launch 'A Relatively Small Attack That Won't Leave Many People Dead'

By Geoffrey Ingersoll | Business Insider


The most probable outcome of all these tensions is a low-level "tactical" strike from North Korea.
But don't worry, it'll be " a relatively small attack that won’t leave many people dead," Sue Mi Terry, a Columbia University professor who served as a senior analyst on North Korea at the CIA from 2001 to 2008, told Wired's Spencer Ackermann.
Analysts in the military, political, and intelligence fields have all pretty much said the same thing: Kim Jong-Un has painted himself into a corner, and the only way out is a gunfight.
Luckily they also say it won't be World War III.
“Chances are not high that they will lead to a full-scale war,” Defense Minister Kim Kwan-jin of South Korea said to Choe Sang-Hun of The New York Times. “But given the nature of the North Korean regime, it’s possible that they will launch a localized provocation.”
Kim only got in this position because of all his talk, but as we've covered before, the posturing and "bellicose bluster" is also a good means for new leaders to consolidate power.
From a Fox News piece on Kim's internal politics:
Kim "needs to show he has the guts. The best way to do that is to use the military might that he commands," said Lee Yoon-gyu, a North Korea expert at Korea National Defense University in Seoul. "This paves the way for greater praise for him if North Korea makes a provocation later and claims victory."
Kim will eventually be compelled to do "something provocative to prove the threats weren't empty," Lee said.
In the past, these attacks included sinking small ships, short-lived artillery barrages, even taking Americans captive. One way or another though, the attacks were not the the sustained or devastating enough to initiate open war.
“It will be something sneaky and creative and hard to definitively trace back to North Korea to avoid international condemnation and immediate retaliation from Washington or Seoul,” Terry told Ackermann.

[Seabass]

Can't we all just get along...

Politicians should not be allowed in politics. We should force hippies and stoners to run our countries.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Look, it's North Korea's right to carry concealed nuclear weapons and use them in self-defense against moose in Canada.

[SteveB]

If someone hasn't brought this up yet. They photoshopped five hovercrafts in their landing training thingie.



They're just silly. I mean, I'm scurred of them! That justifies a war, right?

Worst photoshop job evar.

[FBM]

Yeah, I saw that somewhere in the news recently. Weak. Very weak. I could 'shoop-da-woop better than that.

[SteveB]

It was on The Daily Show. I also get my news from The Colbert Report.

[pErvinalia]

A conversation about whether North Korea's threat is just rhetoric came up on ABC Radio National today. I thought of this thread, but I only caught a couple of minutes as I was just arriving at work ..

That seems to be the talk. Which means that whatever it is NK is doing, it is having an effect. That is, it is making people consider that it might actually be more than empty rhetoric.

[pErvinalia]

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/north-kor ... 43082.html

North Korea Likely To Launch 'A Relatively Small Attack That Won't Leave Many People Dead'

By Geoffrey Ingersoll | Business Insider


The most probable outcome of all these tensions is a low-level "tactical" strike from North Korea.
But don't worry, it'll be " a relatively small attack that won’t leave many people dead," Sue Mi Terry, a Columbia University professor who served as a senior analyst on North Korea at the CIA from 2001 to 2008, told Wired's Spencer Ackermann.
Analysts in the military, political, and intelligence fields have all pretty much said the same thing: Kim Jong-Un has painted himself into a corner, and the only way out is a gunfight.
Luckily they also say it won't be World War III.
“Chances are not high that they will lead to a full-scale war,” Defense Minister Kim Kwan-jin of South Korea said to Choe Sang-Hun of The New York Times. “But given the nature of the North Korean regime, it’s possible that they will launch a localized provocation.”
Kim only got in this position because of all his talk, but as we've covered before, the posturing and "bellicose bluster" is also a good means for new leaders to consolidate power.
From a Fox News piece on Kim's internal politics:
Kim "needs to show he has the guts. The best way to do that is to use the military might that he commands," said Lee Yoon-gyu, a North Korea expert at Korea National Defense University in Seoul. "This paves the way for greater praise for him if North Korea makes a provocation later and claims victory."
Kim will eventually be compelled to do "something provocative to prove the threats weren't empty," Lee said.
In the past, these attacks included sinking small ships, short-lived artillery barrages, even taking Americans captive. One way or another though, the attacks were not the the sustained or devastating enough to initiate open war.
“It will be something sneaky and creative and hard to definitively trace back to North Korea to avoid international condemnation and immediate retaliation from Washington or Seoul,” Terry told Ackermann.

CIA, you've got it wrong. I'll tell ya what's likely to happen. Now that they have nukes, they don't need to do something sneaky. They'll bomb some island or boat or whatever, and threaten the US/SK/etc with nuclear attack if they retaliate. This will be the ultimate test for the US et al. If they don't retaliate, then NK wins and learns something about them. If they do retaliate, then they risk a nuclear war. And because Kim is crackers, no one can definitively rule out that he will use nukes. Common sense would tell us that they won't use nukes, as that would be the very end of them. So what happens if the US et al retaliate and NK doesn't use nukes? Maybe small skirmishes that NK can twist with its media to say that they kicked yankee butt. Either way, Kimmy inc. claim victory. The only problem with that plan is if the US et al retaliate hard. How is Kimmy going to turn bombing of major cities in Nk into a victory for NK?

[FBM]

It was on The Daily Show. I also get my news from The Colbert Report.

That was it.

[FBM]

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/north-kor ... 43082.html

North Korea Likely To Launch 'A Relatively Small Attack That Won't Leave Many People Dead'

By Geoffrey Ingersoll | Business Insider


The most probable outcome of all these tensions is a low-level "tactical" strike from North Korea.
But don't worry, it'll be " a relatively small attack that won’t leave many people dead," Sue Mi Terry, a Columbia University professor who served as a senior analyst on North Korea at the CIA from 2001 to 2008, told Wired's Spencer Ackermann.
Analysts in the military, political, and intelligence fields have all pretty much said the same thing: Kim Jong-Un has painted himself into a corner, and the only way out is a gunfight.
Luckily they also say it won't be World War III.
“Chances are not high that they will lead to a full-scale war,” Defense Minister Kim Kwan-jin of South Korea said to Choe Sang-Hun of The New York Times. “But given the nature of the North Korean regime, it’s possible that they will launch a localized provocation.”
Kim only got in this position because of all his talk, but as we've covered before, the posturing and "bellicose bluster" is also a good means for new leaders to consolidate power.
From a Fox News piece on Kim's internal politics:
Kim "needs to show he has the guts. The best way to do that is to use the military might that he commands," said Lee Yoon-gyu, a North Korea expert at Korea National Defense University in Seoul. "This paves the way for greater praise for him if North Korea makes a provocation later and claims victory."
Kim will eventually be compelled to do "something provocative to prove the threats weren't empty," Lee said.
In the past, these attacks included sinking small ships, short-lived artillery barrages, even taking Americans captive. One way or another though, the attacks were not the the sustained or devastating enough to initiate open war.
“It will be something sneaky and creative and hard to definitively trace back to North Korea to avoid international condemnation and immediate retaliation from Washington or Seoul,” Terry told Ackermann.

CIA, you've got it wrong. I'll tell ya what's likely to happen. Now that they have nukes, they don't need to do something sneaky. They'll bomb some island or boat or whatever, and threaten the US/SK/etc with nuclear attack if they retaliate. This will be the ultimate test for the US et al. If they don't retaliate, then NK wins and learns something about them. If they do retaliate, then they risk a nuclear war. And because Kim is crackers, no one can definitively rule out that he will use nukes. Common sense would tell us that they won't use nukes, as that would be the very end of them. So what happens if the US et al retaliate and NK doesn't use nukes? Maybe small skirmishes that NK can twist with its media to say that they kicked yankee butt. Either way, Kimmy inc. claim victory. The only problem with that plan is if the US et al retaliate hard. How is Kimmy going to turn bombing of major cities in Nk into a victory for NK?

Difficulty: Does NK have their nukes weaponized yet? Nobody believes they have mounted one on a rocket yet, and they won't be able to drop one from a plane...

[pErvinalia]

If that's the case, then we (no, not me) should invade the cunts and end this shit before it gets properly serious. If there's no actual nuke threat (just yet), then make sure there can't ever be a nuke threat.